President Trump’s recently unveiled 20-point proposal to end the war in Gaza, while presented as a balanced framework for peace, fundamentally serves Israeli strategic interests while offering Palestinians little beyond humanitarian relief and vague promises of future self-determination.
The plan delivers Israel’s core security demands without requiring meaningful concessions. Hamas is to be completely dismantled, with all military infrastructure destroyed, weapons decommissioned, and the organization barred from any role in Gaza’s governance. This represents the total achievement of Israel’s stated war aims—the elimination of Hamas as a governing and military entity.
Meanwhile, Israel retains the ability to maintain a “security perimeter presence” indefinitely, with withdrawal tied to subjective “standards, milestones, and timeframes” that Israel itself will help determine. This gives Israel effective veto power over its own withdrawal, allowing it to remain in Gaza as long as it deems necessary for security purposes.
The plan guarantees the return of all Israeli hostages within 72 hours of acceptance, addressing Israel’s most immediate concern. In exchange, Israel releases prisoners but faces no other political costs. The prisoner exchange—250 life-sentence prisoners plus 1,700 post-October 7 detainees—is modest compared to previous negotiations, and Israel maintains control over which prisoners qualify for release.
Critically, Israel achieves hostage return without having to negotiate directly with Hamas, legitimize the organization, or make territorial or political concessions beyond the prisoner exchange.
The plan’s demilitarization provisions represent a permanent strategic victory for Israel. Gaza is to be completely disarmed under international supervision, with tunnels destroyed, weapons production eliminated, and a buyback program ensuring no military capability remains. This transforms Gaza from a potential security threat into a permanently pacified zone.
An International Stabilization Force, working with vetted Palestinian police and consulting with Israel on border security, essentially outsources Gaza’s policing to international actors who will prevent any future military buildup. Israel gains a demilitarized neighbor without bearing the burden of occupation or international criticism for direct control.
While the plan explicitly states Israel will not annex Gaza, this costs Israel nothing since annexation of the densely populated, destroyed territory has never been a serious Israeli policy goal. The international outcry such annexation would provoke makes this “concession” essentially meaningless.
More importantly, through its role in determining withdrawal timelines, participating in security coordination with the ISF, and maintaining a perimeter presence, Israel retains effective control over Gaza’s security envelope without the legal, demographic, or political complications of formal annexation.
Notably absent from the plan is any requirement for Israel to freeze settlement expansion or modify its policies in the West Bank. According to reports, Trump assured Israeli leaders he would not allow annexation of the West Bank, but this merely maintains the status quo rather than rolling back Israeli control. Settlement expansion can continue unabated while attention focuses on Gaza reconstruction.
The plan’s vague references to a “credible pathway to Palestinian self-determination” are conditional on Palestinian Authority reforms and Gaza’s successful reconstruction—processes that could take years or decades, if they happen at all.
The plan’s emphasis on economic development and reconstruction serves Israeli interests by potentially stabilizing Gaza and reducing humanitarian pressure on Israel, while indefinitely deferring political questions about Palestinian sovereignty and statehood. The creation of a “special economic zone” and ambitious rebuilding plans may generate international investment, but Palestinians remain under external governance with no clear timeline for self-rule.
The technocratic committee governing Gaza, overseen by a “Board of Peace” chaired by Trump and including figures like Tony Blair, ensures that Palestinians have no meaningful political control over their territory even after the war ends. This governance structure could persist indefinitely, with the plan only promising a transition to Palestinian Authority control once PA reforms are completed—a subjective standard Israel and its allies can influence.
Perhaps most significantly, the plan provides retrospective legitimization for Israel’s military campaign. By achieving Hamas’s removal through a U.S.-backed framework, Israel transforms what critics have called a catastrophic humanitarian disaster into a necessary prelude to peace and reconstruction. The plan’s language about Gaza being “deradicalised” and creating a “terror-free zone” adopts Israeli framing of the conflict.
The international community’s participation in reconstruction, governance, and security effectively endorses Israel’s assessment that the destruction of Gaza’s infrastructure and governance was justified to eliminate Hamas.
What do Palestinians gain? Humanitarian aid, reconstruction assistance, and the end of active warfare—all essential but representing relief from suffering rather than political progress. The promise of eventual self-determination is vague, distant, and conditional on meeting standards that others will judge.
Palestinians receive no sovereignty, no control over borders, no say in their governance structure, no clear timeline for self-rule, and no path to statehood beyond distant promises. They gain the right to remain in a demilitarized territory governed by technocrats and international forces, with their political future deferred indefinitely.
President Trump’s plan may indeed end the immediate warfare in Gaza, a humanitarian necessity given the catastrophic death toll and destruction. However, examining its provisions reveals a framework that systematically advances Israeli strategic objectives while offering Palestinians little beyond survival and the distant hope of future self-determination.
Israel emerges with Hamas eliminated, Gaza permanently demilitarized, its hostages returned, international forces managing security, and the political status of Palestinian statehood deferred indefinitely. The plan transforms Israel’s military campaign into an internationally sanctioned prelude to a new order in Gaza—one that serves Israeli security interests while leaving fundamental questions of Palestinian rights and sovereignty unresolved.
In any assessment of winners and losers, Israel clearly stands as the primary beneficiary of this proposal.